White House Warns Against Blaming Religion of Islam After Ohio State Attack

The issues you speak of in those countries are political and cultural issues. Islam itself does not call for this division. The Quran does not call
for this division. The Quran says that Christians should be left in peace, as long as they are not attacking Muslims.

That depends entirely on the interpretation of the Qur'an.

The strictest literal interpretations often lead to radicalization.

The same thing could be said about the Bible.

There is much violence in the Bible. There is much violence in the Quran.

The parts of the Bible that talk about violence are referring to a time before Christ came. The parts of the Quran that talk about violence are
referring to specific battles in history involving Muslims. In both cases, the logical interpretation is that neither religion calls for violence
today.

You see, the difference between the Bible and the Qur'an, is when you analyze support for violence in the Old Testament, Christians know that they
aren't bound to that law anymore. A lot of Christian violence from 1000 years ago came from politics and control married into the religion. The
evils in the name of old Christianity were due to people not reading the book but believing what their authority figures told them. And if they
didn't listen they were executed.

Sure you can say the same thing about Islam now, but it is inherently a political ideology on top of a religious fundamental belief system. There is
no 'old law' or 'new law' - it is just the Qur'an. Then it is to be paired with the Hadith and things really get cooking. Yes the Qur'an can be
picked piece by piece and compartmentalized into peaceful sections... but the truth is is that it fundamentally will call for violence like what we
see today.

The fundamental Christians call for their brand of morality by belief and abstaining from "sins". Anyone trying to press Christianity upon another
physically is not reading the book.

The fundamental Muslims will want a complete political and law system set up which are completely barbaric, in comparison to Western culture.

It always tickles me when people compare Christianity to Islam, even 1000 years ago. Because the texts are quite different. I believe it's also a
red herring and will never solve the world's problem of violence & Islam.

Although it is a comparison used often. Until you study the Qur'an and have seen how it is used to practice Islamic life within Islamic culture and
especially in predominantly Islamic communities and countries. You can only pretend to know.

ISIS is a form of extreme Islamic beliefs and those who support it do not use logical thinking.

ISIS is a political group that wants total control. They use religion because it makes it easier to control and manipulate. They pull the most violent
parts out of the Quran and twist it to make their group seem more powerful and "right". They use it to recruit people, and they use it to control
people. The people most vulnerable to falling for their propaganda are those who feel disenfranchised and angry about the horrible lives they have.

ISIS is a form of extreme Islamic beliefs and those who support it do not use logical thinking.

ISIS is a political group that wants total control. They use religion because it makes it easier to control and manipulate. They pull the most violent
parts out of the Quran and twist it to make their group seem more powerful and "right". They use it to recruit people, and they use it to control
people. The people most vulnerable to falling for their propaganda are those who feel disenfranchised and angry about the horrible lives they
have.

Right,,,, so instead of calling them exactly what they are, Islamic extremists, we must refer to them as a political group, so the argument about
religion doesn't apply.

You are correct that the acts of terror have nothing to do with religious belief. You are correct in your implication that the terror is done only "in
the name" of Islam, not because of anything the Quran says. "In name only" does not mean that Islam has anything really to do with these acts of
terror. These acts of terror are strictly political - not religious.

That's why the adjective 'radical' would be used.

This mental box you've put yourself in has little relationship to the real world and how people generally behave. In fact, your perspective produces
the very outcome you are trying to avoid.

ISIS is a form of extreme Islamic beliefs and those who support it do not use logical thinking.

ISIS is a political group that wants total control. They use religion because it makes it easier to control and manipulate. They pull the most violent
parts out of the Quran and twist it to make their group seem more powerful and "right". They use it to recruit people, and they use it to control
people. The people most vulnerable to falling for their propaganda are those who feel disenfranchised and angry about the horrible lives they
have.

Right,,,, so instead of calling them exactly what they are, Islamic extremists, we must refer to them as a political group, so the argument about
religion doesn't apply.

Cherry pick much?

You are delusional if you don't know that organized religion has always included an element of politics and control over the masses. Looking at
Christian history, do you think the higher echelon in the Catholic religion were really all that religious? They were ambitious and power-hungry. It
was all about power and control. They did so many things that were totally against what Christ taught. So many average people fell for the propaganda
because they thought they were doing the right thing by following their religious leaders.

ISIS is a form of extreme Islamic beliefs and those who support it do not use logical thinking.

ISIS is a political group that wants total control. They use religion because it makes it easier to control and manipulate. They pull the most violent
parts out of the Quran and twist it to make their group seem more powerful and "right". They use it to recruit people, and they use it to control
people. The people most vulnerable to falling for their propaganda are those who feel disenfranchised and angry about the horrible lives they
have.

Right,,,, so instead of calling them exactly what they are, Islamic extremists, we must refer to them as a political group, so the argument about
religion doesn't apply.

Cherry pick much?

You are delusional if you don't know that organized religion has always included an element of politics and control over the masses. Looking at
Christian history, do you think the higher echelon in the Catholic religion were really all that religious? They were ambitious and power-hungry. It
was all about power and control. They did so many things that were totally against what Christ taught. So many average people fell for the propaganda
because they thought they were doing the right thing by following their religious leaders.

So we agree that ISIS, a group of religious Islamic extremists, is based on religion but operating as you call it a political force.

Doesn't change the fact that their leader, whathisname, is in charge of a bunch of religious Islamic extremists nutjobs.

You can call him the President or whatever political title that makes you feel better, of the nation of NonBelieversmustdie... I will call them
exactly what they are: Islamic Extremists.

Makes sense to me.

As far as I know, no one refers to ISIS in an official state capacity.

Yea again. And as long as folks love to single out the actions of a few to paint the whole, i'm going to continue to bring it up because people are
fine and dandy to talk smack about a group of people but soon as the shoe is on the other foot, then the litany of excuses come roaring out the mouths
of naysayers.

And JUST LIKE those radicals, the KKK use their religion as a justification of their actions.

The issues you speak of in those countries are political and cultural issues. Islam itself does not call for this division. The Quran does not call
for this division. The Quran says that Christians should be left in peace, as long as they are not attacking Muslims.

As long as they pay the Jizya tax. Taxing non-Muslims so that they may practice their faiths is a racket, and is "division" par excellence.

"Fight those of the People of the Book who do not [truly] believe in God and the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have
forbidden, who do not behave according to the rule of justice, until they pay the tax and submit to it. (tr. Abdel-Haleem)

By refusing to associate ISIS with Islam, one is helping to de-mystify them to their religious followers. By hammering home their political nature,
their followers will eventually realize that ISIS isn't about following Islam at all, it's about political control. This might actually stop many who
are truly religious from following them.

By associating them with Islam, even as "radical" or "extremist", it confirms to their religious followers that they are doing the "right thing". Is
this what we really want? Is this really the wise thing to do? I think ISIS loves it when we do this. I think it helps them immensely.

I say it's better to disassociate them from Islam altogether. It's better to only associate them with greed, power and political control.

By refusing to associate ISIS with Islam, one is helping to de-mystify them to their religious followers. By hammering home their political nature,
their followers will eventually realize that ISIS isn't about following Islam at all, it's about political control. This might actually stop many who
are truly religious from following them.

By associating them with Islam, even as "radical" or "extremist", it confirms to their religious followers that they are doing the "right thing". Is
this what we really want? Is this really the wise thing to do? I think ISIS loves it when we do this. I think it helps them immensely.

I say it's better to disassociate them from Islam altogether. It's better to only associate them with greed, power and political control.

By refusing to associate ISIS with Islam, one is helping to de-mystify them to their religious followers. By hammering home their political nature,
their followers will eventually realize that ISIS isn't about following Islam at all, it's about political control. This might actually stop many who
are truly religious from following them.

By associating them with Islam, even as "radical" or "extremist", it confirms to their religious followers that they are doing the "right thing". Is
this what we really want? Is this really the wise thing to do? I think ISIS loves it when we do this. I think it helps them immensely.

I say it's better to disassociate them from Islam altogether. It's better to only associate them with greed, power and political control.

Okay..you go right on believing that. I will pass.

Aaaaaannnnddd, this is why we will continue to see more people going to the dark side of ISIS. Congrats.

The Somalian kid was subjected to a rigorous vetting process. His whole family was. It was a two year process from what I heard. What about people who
become a threat AFTER they come here? There are limits to every process. The CIA does extreme vetting that takes place continuously over decades and
yet, it hasn't stopped the occassional flip has it?

No amount of vetting will ever predict the future.

What about American Muslims?

This is you:

People lock the doors to their house yet still people break into peoples houses and murder them in their sleep, Locks are not perfect, locks do not
stop criminals 100% of the time, locks are useless. Lets not put a lock on the door anymore because locks oppose liberty and freedom.

By refusing to associate ISIS with Islam, one is helping to de-mystify them to their religious followers. By hammering home their political nature,
their followers will eventually realize that ISIS isn't about following Islam at all, it's about political control. This might actually stop many who
are truly religious from following them.

By associating them with Islam, even as "radical" or "extremist", it confirms to their religious followers that they are doing the "right thing". Is
this what we really want? Is this really the wise thing to do? I think ISIS loves it when we do this. I think it helps them immensely.

I say it's better to disassociate them from Islam altogether. It's better to only associate them with greed, power and political control.

Okay..you go right on believing that. I will pass.

Aaaaaannnnddd, this is why we will continue to see more people going to the dark side of ISIS. Congrats.

Right.. because if no one ever calls them Islamic Extremists.. they will all give up go home.

What about them? If they pop out on the radar as radicals then they should be kept a eye on just like the rest. If it were up to me the punishment for
murdering americans in the name of islam would include a 1 way ticket to a isis run country. That way when they want to get in again they need to
either do that legally and get vetted and denied or illegally making it a whole damn lot harder for them to do anything.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.